Brightness of distant galaxies problem

  • Thread starter Thread starter whiterabbit90
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Brightness Galaxies
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around calculating the brightness of a distant object based on its spectral line and brightness at a certain distance. The subject area includes concepts of redshift, luminosity, and brightness in astrophysics.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore different methods to calculate the brightness of the object at a distance of 700 Mpc, including using redshift and luminosity equations. There are questions about the validity of their calculations and the units involved.

Discussion Status

Participants are actively comparing results from different approaches, with some expressing uncertainty about their calculations. There is a recognition of potential errors in the calculations, and a few participants suggest revisiting the math to clarify discrepancies.

Contextual Notes

There is an emphasis on ensuring that all units are consistent throughout the calculations. Participants are also navigating the implications of using different methods to arrive at similar results.

whiterabbit90
Messages
4
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



An object gives out a spectral line of 919nm compared to that of 589nm in a laboratory. It has a brigtness of 1.2 x 10-11 W m-2. The objective is to find out the brightness of the object if it were at 700 Mpc.

Homework Equations



1. Z (redshift)= change in wavelength / original wavelength

2. V= Z X C

3. V= H0D

4. F= L / 4 pi r2


The Attempt at a Solution



The redshift value I find to be 0.56 using equation 1. Using this I calculate the speed as 168000 km s-1 using equation 2. I then work out the distance of the object to be 2400Mpc using equation 3 rearranged. now from here do I use equation 4 to calculate the luminosity and then change the distance to 700Mpc or do I divide 2400Mpc by 700Mpc to get how many times closer the object will be square the answer ( 3.432) and times it by the original brightness 1.2 x 10-11 W m-2?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Try both ways and see if they give the same answer or not.
 
I tried both, equation 4 gives me an answer of 4.932 x 10-9 and using divide and square i get 1.411 x 10-10 both seem plausible answers.
 
In what units?

If they're the units I suspect you meant, one of those answers is wrong - and not just in the obvious sense that they can't both be right; you miscalculated one of them. Go back and check your math.
 
both should be in units of W m-2. In equation 4 I converted Mpc to metres same luminosity is Watts. My equation for 4 looks like this rearranged.

L= F x 4 pi r2

Putting in the values gives 1.2 x 10-11 W m-2(F) x 4 pi (7.44x 1025)2 m (r2) = 8.35 x 1041 W (L)

With that I get luminosity to be 8.35 x 1041 W (L)

Using equation 4 as F= L / 4 pi r2 and using the new value for Luminosity I get.

8.35 x 1041 W / (4 pi (2.17 x 1025)2)m2 = 4.932 x 10-9 W m-2

Can anyone tell me where in that I am going wrong as the equations and units all seem to add up if anything I feel this may be the correct answer and the other method using 3.432 may be wrong. However as 3.432 does not have units is shouldn't effect W m-2.
 
whiterabbit90 said:
8.35 x 1041 W / (4 pi (2.17 x 1025)2)m2 = 4.932 x 10-9 W m-2
This is the problem. The result of that calculation is not 4.932\times 10^{-9}\frac{\mathrm{W}}{\mathrm{m}^2}.
 
I just calculated it and got 1.411 x 10-10 I think the problem was I was squaring the entire bottom half of the divide rather than the distance. A stupid mistake but guess we all make them. I assume since both equations give the same answer that is the right answer?
 
Yeah, everybody makes stupid mistakes ;)

Usually when you can do something two different ways and get the same answer, chances are good that you got it right.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
977
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
7K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
3K